Not sure if WebEx has a chat function which can be used to ask questions in writing. Remote and local questions can then be interleaved! Usually remote questions pile up faster than local ones. I am sure the chairs will ensure fairness in the scheduling alogorithm.
Siamack -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pat Thaler Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:20 PM To: Anoop Ghanwani; Melinda Shore Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [nvo3] remote participation for NVO3 interim meeting Since we will have WebEx for this meeting, remote participants could use that instead of jabber to pose questions by voice. WebEx has a hand raising mechanism which I've seen effectively used with larger meetings. People on the phone don't have to blurt out their questions to get in the queue. For it to work well, someone at the meeting should be assigned to monitor the hand raising queue (perhaps the same person running the in person queue or perhaps it would help to have someone else monitor it to ensure it doesn't get forgotten in the press of business). Then the remote participants can be recognized to speak as are those queued at the mike. Regards, Pat -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anoop Ghanwani Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:00 PM To: Melinda Shore Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [nvo3] remote participation for NVO3 interim meeting During regular working group meetings, the queues get cut off very quickly, sometimes before the remote person's question catches the attention of the of the jabber scribe and the the jabber scribe is willing to go up to the queue. (The jabber scribe definitely has his/her hands full. :)) Also, when in person and at the mic, if one get's a blank look from the presenter, one can rephrase the question. Additionally, one can quickly reply and/or ask for clarification immediately following the response while at the mic. All this becomes a lot harder with a scribe. Can be done, but the speed of regular WG meetings is often not supportive of it. Now if I had a roomful of people eagerly waiting to hear and digest my expert opinion... Anoop On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Melinda Shore <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8/23/12 3:14 PM, Anoop Ghanwani wrote: >> >> I have attended a WG meeting remotely and found that while >> it's mostly possible to follow what is happening, it is almost >> impossible to participate meaningfully. Jabber is too slow >> because often questions/answers require quick turn around >> and at least regular WG meetings move too quickly for that. > > > I've participated in working group sessions remotely dozens of > times and I don't quite understand this comment. It's not as > if you can just pipe up when the spirit moves you when you're in > the room, either - you have to stand in line and wait your turn. > There's not much multi-party discussion, either. Ultimately > how successful remote participation is comes down to the attentiveness > of the chairs, I think. > > Melinda > > > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
